- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine

Physical Review D

Reuse & Permissions

It is not necessary to obtain permission to reuse this article or its components as it is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI are maintained. Please note that some figures may have been included with permission from other third parties. It is your responsibility to obtain the proper permission from the rights holder directly for these figures.

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Open Access

Energy-enhanced expansion of the standard model effective field theory

Benoît Assi1,2,* and Adam Martin3,†

  • *Contact author: bassi@fnal.gov
  • †Contact author: amarti41@nd.edu
PDF

Phys. Rev. D 112, 015024 – Published 25 July, 2025

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/s18f-xch8

Abstract

We formalize energy-scaling arguments in the standard model effective field theory (SMEFT) to estimate the effects of operators up to dimension ten. Our approach relies on weakly coupled UV completions with no presumed large hierarchies between the Wilson coefficients. We introduce a classification based on the number of external legs and an energy-counting parameter. We establish a dual expansion in v/Λ and E/Λ. Extending to four-, five-, and six-particle vertices, our framework highlights energy-enhanced operators that dominate high-energy processes at the High Luminosity-Large Hadron Collider. This organization streamlines experimental analyses to only include operators with energetic impact in their analyses and enhances the discoverability of new physics within the SMEFT framework.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (75)

  1. W. Buchmuller and D. Wyler, Effective Lagrangian analysis of new interactions and flavor conservation, Nucl. Phys. B268, 621 (1986).
  2. B. Grzadkowski, M. Iskrzynski, M. Misiak, and J. Rosiek, Dimension-six terms in the standard model Lagrangian, J. High Energy Phys. 10 (2010) 085.
  3. I. Brivio and M. Trott, The standard model as an effective field theory, Phys. Rep. 793, 1 (2019).
  4. J. Y. Araz, S. Banerjee, R. S. Gupta, and M. Spannowsky, Precision SMEFT bounds from the VBF Higgs at high transverse momentum, J. High Energy Phys. 04 (2021) 125.
  5. R. Contino, M. Ghezzi, C. Grojean, M. Muhlleitner, and M. Spira, Effective Lagrangian for a light Higgs-like scalar, J. High Energy Phys. 07 (2013) 035.
  6. A. Falkowski and F. Riva, Model-independent precision constraints on dimension-6 operators, J. High Energy Phys. 02 (2015) 039.
  7. C. Englert and M. Spannowsky, Effective theories and measurements at colliders, Phys. Lett. B 740, 8 (2015).
  8. R. S. Gupta, A. Pomarol, and F. Riva, BSM primary effects, Phys. Rev. D 91, 035001 (2015).
  9. G. Amar, S. Banerjee, S. von Buddenbrock, A. S. Cornell, T. Mandal, B. Mellado, and B. Mukhopadhyaya, Exploration of the tensor structure of the Higgs boson coupling to weak bosons in e+  e− collisions, J. High Energy Phys. 02 (2015) 128.
  10. M. Buschmann, D. Goncalves, S. Kuttimalai, M. Schonherr, F. Krauss, and T. Plehn, Mass effects in the Higgs-Gluon coupling: Boosted vs off-shell production, J. High Energy Phys. 02 (2015) 038.
  11. N. Craig, M. Farina, M. McCullough, and M. Perelstein, Precision Higgsstrahlung as a probe of new physics, J. High Energy Phys. 03 (2015) 146.
  12. J. Ellis, V. Sanz, and T. You, Complete Higgs sector constraints on dimension-6 operators, J. High Energy Phys. 07 (2014) 036.
  13. J. Ellis, V. Sanz, and T. You, The effective standard model after LHC run I, J. High Energy Phys. 03 (2015) 157.
  14. S. Banerjee, T. Mandal, B. Mellado, and B. Mukhopadhyaya, Cornering dimension-6HVV interactions at high luminosity LHC: the role of event ratios, J. High Energy Phys. 09 (2015) 057.
  15. C. Englert, R. Kogler, H. Schulz, and M. Spannowsky, Higgs coupling measurements at the LHC, Eur. Phys. J. C 76, 393 (2016).
  16. R. Contino, A. Falkowski, F. Goertz, C. Grojean, and F. Riva, On the validity of the effective field theory approach to SM precision tests, J. High Energy Phys. 07 (2016) 144.
  17. A. Biekötter, J. Brehmer, and T. Plehn, Extending the limits of Higgs effective theory, Phys. Rev. D 94, 055032 (2016).
  18. T. Barklow, K. Fujii, S. Jung, R. Karl, J. List, T. Ogawa, M. E. Peskin, and J. Tian, Improved formalism for precision Higgs coupling fits, Phys. Rev. D 97, 053003 (2018).
  19. T. Barklow, K. Fujii, S. Jung, M. E. Peskin, and J. Tian, Model-independent determination of the triple Higgs coupling at e+e− colliders, Phys. Rev. D 97, 053004 (2018).
  20. C. Englert, R. Kogler, H. Schulz, and M. Spannowsky, Higgs characterisation in the presence of theoretical uncertainties and invisible decays, Eur. Phys. J. C 77, 789 (2017).
  21. S. Banerjee, C. Englert, R. S. Gupta, and M. Spannowsky, Probing electroweak precision physics via boosted Higgs-Strahlung at the LHC, Phys. Rev. D 98, 095012 (2018).
  22. C. Grojean, M. Montull, and M. Riembau, Diboson at the LHC vs LEP, J. High Energy Phys. 03 (2019) 020.
  23. A. Biekoetter, T. Corbett, and T. Plehn, The Gauge-Higgs legacy of the LHC run II, SciPost Phys. 6, 064 (2019).
  24. D. Goncalves and J. Nakamura, Boosting the H→ invisibles searches with Z boson polarization, Phys. Rev. D 99, 055021 (2019).
  25. R. Gomez-Ambrosio, Studies of dimension-six EFT effects in vector boson scattering, Eur. Phys. J. C 79, 389 (2019).
  26. F. F. Freitas, C. K. Khosa, and V. Sanz, Exploring SMEFT in VH with machine learning, Phys. Rev. D 100, 035040 (2019).
  27. S. Banerjee, R. S. Gupta, J. Y. Reiness, and M. Spannowsky, Resolving the tensor structure of the Higgs coupling to Z-bosons via Higgs-Strahlung, Phys. Rev. D 100, 115004 (2019).
  28. S. Banerjee, R. S. Gupta, J. Y. Reiness, S. Seth, and M. Spannowsky, Towards the ultimate differential SMEFT analysis, J. High Energy Phys. 09 (2020) 170.
  29. A. Biekötter, R. Gomez-Ambrosio, P. Gregg, F. Krauss, and M. Schönherr, Constraining SMEFT operators with associated hγ production in weak boson fusion, Phys. Lett. B 814, 136079 (2021).
  30. J. Ellis, C. W. Murphy, V. Sanz, and T. You, Updated global SMEFT fit to Higgs, Diboson and electroweak data, J. High Energy Phys. 06 (2018) 146.
  31. J. Ellis, M. Madigan, K. Mimasu, V. Sanz, and T. You, Top, Higgs, Diboson and electroweak fit to the standard model effective field theory, J. High Energy Phys. 04 (2021) 279.
  32. R. Bartocci, A. Biekötter, and T. Hurth, A global analysis of the SMEFT under the minimal MFV assumption, J. High Energy Phys. 05 (2024) 074.
  33. T. Giani, G. Magni, and J. Rojo, SMEFiT: A flexible toolbox for global interpretations of particle physics data with effective field theories, Eur. Phys. J. C 83, 393 (2023).
  34. A. Dedes, W. Materkowska, M. Paraskevas, J. Rosiek, and K. Suxho, Feynman rules for the standard model effective field theory in Rξ-gauges, J. High Energy Phys. 06 (2017) 143.
  35. A. Dedes, J. Rosiek, M. Ryczkowski, K. Suxho, and L. Trifyllis, SmeftFR v3—Feynman rules generator for the standard model effective field theory, Comput. Phys. Commun. 294, 108943 (2024).
  36. B. Henning, X. Lu, T. Melia, and H. Murayama, 2, 84, 30, 993, 560, 15456, 11962, 261485, …: Higher dimension operators in the SM EFT, J. High Energy Phys. 08 (2017) 016.
  37. B. Assi, A. Helset, A. V. Manohar, J. Pagès, and C.-H. Shen, Fermion geometry and the renormalization of the standard model effective field theory, J. High Energy Phys. 11 (2023) 201.
  38. M. Chala, G. Guedes, M. Ramos, and J. Santiago, Towards the renormalisation of the standard model effective field theory to dimension eight: Bosonic interactions I, SciPost Phys. 11, 065 (2021).
  39. S. Das Bakshi, M. Chala, A. Díaz-Carmona, and G. Guedes, Towards the renormalisation of the standard model effective field theory to dimension eight: Bosonic interactions II, Eur. Phys. J. Plus 137, 973 (2022).
  40. S. D. Bakshi, M. Chala, A. Díaz-Carmona, Z. Ren, and F. Vilches, Renormalization of the SMEFT to dimension eight: Fermionic interactions I, J. High Energy Phys. 12 (2025) 214.
  41. R. Boughezal, Y. Huang, and F. Petriello, Renormalization-group running of dimension-8 four-fermion operators in the SMEFT, Phys. Rev. D 110, 116015 (2024).
  42. A. Helset, E. E. Jenkins, and A. V. Manohar, Renormalization of the standard model effective field theory from geometry, J. High Energy Phys. 02 (2023) 063.
  43. B. Assi and A. Martin, Energy-enhanced dimension eight SMEFT effects in VBF Higgs production, J. High Energy Phys. 02 (2025) 029.
  44. T. Kim and A. Martin, Monolepton production in SMEFT to O(1/Λ4) and beyond, J. High Energy Phys. 09 (2022) 124.
  45. A. Martin, A case study of SMEFT O(1/Λ4) effects in Diboson processes: pp→ W±(ℓ±  ν)γ, J. High Energy Phys. 05 (2024) 223.
  46. T. Corbett and A. Martin, Higgs associated production with a vector decaying to two fermions in the geoSMEFT, SciPost Phys. 16, 019 (2024).
  47. C. Degrande and H.-L. Li, Impact of dimension-8 SMEFT operators on diboson productions, J. High Energy Phys. 06 (2023) 149.
  48. A. Helset, A. Martin, and M. Trott, The geometric standard model effective field theory, J. High Energy Phys. 03 (2020) 163.
  49. J. de Blas, M. Chala, M. Perez-Victoria, and J. Santiago, Observable effects of general new scalar particles, J. High Energy Phys. 04 (2015) 078.
  50. J. de Blas, J. C. Criado, M. Perez-Victoria, and J. Santiago, Effective description of general extensions of the standard model: The complete tree-level dictionary, J. High Energy Phys. 03 (2018) 109.
  51. A. Carmona, A. Lazopoulos, P. Olgoso, and J. Santiago, Matchmakereft: Automated tree-level and one-loop matching, SciPost Phys. 12, 198 (2022).
  52. J. Fuentes-Martín, M. König, J. Pagès, A. E. Thomsen, and F. Wilsch, A proof of concept for matchete: An automated tool for matching effective theories, Eur. Phys. J. C 83, 662 (2023).
  53. X.-X. Li, Z. Ren, and J.-H. Yub, Complete tree-level dictionary between simplified BSM models and SMEFT d≤7 operators, Phys. Rev. D 109, 095041 (2024).
  54. C. Hays, A. Helset, A. Martin, and M. Trott, Exact SMEFT formulation and expansion to O(v4/Λ4), J. High Energy Phys. 11 (2020) 087.
  55. T. Corbett, A. Helset, A. Martin, and M. Trott, EWPD in the SMEFT to dimension eight, J. High Energy Phys. 06 (2021) 076.
  56. Y. Shadmi and Y. Weiss, Effective field theory amplitudes the on-shell way: Scalar and vector couplings to gluons, J. High Energy Phys. 02 (2019) 165.
  57. T. Ma, J. Shu, and M.-L. Xiao, Standard model effective field theory from on-shell amplitudes, Chin. Phys. C 47, 023105 (2023).
  58. R. Aoude and C. S. Machado, The rise of SMEFT on-shell amplitudes, J. High Energy Phys. 12 (2019) 058.
  59. G. Durieux, T. Kitahara, C. S. Machado, Y. Shadmi, and Y. Weiss, Constructing massive on-shell contact terms, J. High Energy Phys. 12 (2020) 175.
  60. M. Accettulli Huber and S. De Angelis, Standard model EFTs via on-shell methods, J. High Energy Phys. 11 (2021) 221.
  61. C. Arzt, M. Einhorn, and J. Wudka, Patterns of deviation from the standard model, Nucl. Phys. B433, 41 (1995).
  62. G. Buchalla, G. Heinrich, C. Müller-Salditt, and F. Pandler, Loop counting matters in SMEFT, SciPost Phys. 15, 088 (2023).
  63. N. Craig, M. Jiang, Y.-Y. Li, and D. Sutherland, Loops and trees in generic EFTs, J. High Energy Phys. 08 (2020) 086.
  64. G. D’Ambrosio, G. F. Giudice, G. Isidori, and A. Strumia, Minimal flavor violation: An effective field theory approach, Nucl. Phys. B645, 155 (2002).
  65. F. Bishara, P. Englert, C. Grojean, G. Panico, and A. N. Rossia, Revisiting Vh(→bb¯) at the LHC and FCC-hh, J. High Energy Phys. 06 (2023) 077.
  66. E. Celada, T. Giani, J. ter Hoeve, L. Mantani, J. Rojo, A. N. Rossia, M. O. A. Thomas, and E. Vryonidou, Mapping the SMEFT at high-energy colliders: from LEP and the (HL-)LHC to the FCC-ee, J. High Energy Phys. 09 (2024) 091.
  67. C. Hays, A. Martin, V. Sanz, and J. Setford, On the impact of dimension-eight SMEFT operators on Higgs measurements, J. High Energy Phys. 02 (2019) 123.
  68. H. Elvang and Y.-t. Huang, Scattering amplitudes, arXiv:1308.1697.
  69. E. Arganda, C. Garcia-Garcia, and M. J. Herrero, Probing the Higgs self-coupling through double Higgs production in vector boson scattering at the LHC, Nucl. Phys. B945, 114687 (2019).
  70. M. Cepeda et al., Report from working group 2: Higgs physics at the HL-LHC and HE-LHC, CERN Yellow Rep. Monogr. 7, 221 (2019).
  71. J. Chen, C.-T. Lu, and Y. Wu, Measuring Higgs boson self-couplings with 2→3 VBS processes, J. High Energy Phys. 10 (2021) 099.
  72. R. Gómez-Ambrosio, F. J. Llanes-Estrada, A. Salas-Bernárdez, and J. J. Sanz-Cillero, Distinguishing electroweak EFTs with WLWL→n×h, Phys. Rev. D 106, 053004 (2022).
  73. A. Tumasyan et al. (CMS Collaboration), Search for nonresonant pair production of highly energetic Higgs bosons decaying to bottom quarks, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 041803 (2023).
  74. A. Cappati, R. Covarelli, P. Torrielli, and M. Zaro, Sensitivity to new physics in final states with multiple gauge and Higgs bosons, J. High Energy Phys. 09 (2022) 038.
  75. R. L. Delgado, R. Gómez-Ambrosio, J. Martínez-Martín, A. Salas-Bernárdez, and J. J. Sanz-Cillero, Production of two, three, and four Higgs bosons: Where SMEFT and HEFT depart, J. High Energy Phys. 03 (2024) 037.

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. D 112, 015024– Published 25 July, 2025
  • Received 24 April 2025
  • Accepted 19 June 2025
Crossmark - Check for updates button
Creative Commons Logo

Published by the American Physical Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. Further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the published article’s title, journal citation, and DOI. Funded by SCOAP3.

Published by the American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation